Early Judicial Interpretation: Preamble as a Non-Operative Part

In the early years after the Constitution came into effect, the Supreme Court viewed the Preamble merely as an introductory note. In the Berubari Union Case (1960), the Court held that:

“The Preamble is not a part of the Constitution; it only indicates the general purpose of the document.”

The Court’s opinion emerged during a Presidential Reference under Article 143, concerning the exchange of enclaves between India and Pakistan. It ruled that the Preamble could not confer any substantive powers on the government — those powers could arise only from specific constitutional provisions.

The Shift Begins: Sajjan Singh Case (1965)

A gradual shift in perception began with Sajjan Singh v. State of Rajasthan (1965). Justice Madholkar observed that:

“The Preamble is marked by precision and is an epitome of the broad features of the Constitution.”

This observation indicated that the Preamble encapsulated the core philosophy and framework of the Constitution. It also hinted that the Berubari judgment might need reconsideration.

Reaffirming the Preamble’s Role: Bharati Chandra Case (1970)

In Bharati Chandra v. State of Mysore (1970), the Supreme Court acknowledged that Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles were best understood in the light of the Preamble, reinforcing its interpretative value in constitutional matters.

The Landmark Judgment: Kesavananda Bharati Case (1973)

The turning point came in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973), a case that changed the constitutional landscape of India forever. The Court had to decide:

1. Whether the Preamble is a part of the Constitution, and

2. Whether it can be amended under Article 368.

The Supreme Court overturned its earlier decision in the Berubari case, holding that the Preamble is indeed a part of the Constitution. Chief Justice S.M. Sikri emphasized:

“The Preamble is of extreme importance and the Constitution should be read and interpreted in the light of the grand and noble vision expressed in it.”

The Court further ruled that while the Preamble can be amended, its basic features cannot be destroyed or altered. The “basic structure doctrine” thus emerged from this case, defining the inviolable essence of the Constitution.

The 42nd Amendment (1976): Clarifying the Preamble

The 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1976, made the first and only amendment to the Preamble, inserting the words:

• “Socialist”,

• “Secular”, and

• “Integrity” (after “Unity of the Nation”).

This amendment was upheld as valid because these terms were already implicit in the original Preamble and constitutional philosophy. Hence, the amendment did not alter the basic structure but clarified it.

Judicial Consensus and Present Status

Post-Kesavananda, the Supreme Court has consistently treated the Preamble as an integral part of the Constitution. It is both a source of inspiration and a key to constitutional interpretation.
However, the Court maintains that the Preamble cannot be used to derive powers or override explicit provisions of the Constitution.

Thus, the Preamble remains amendable under Article 368, but its essential principles — Sovereignty, Democracy, Republic, Justice, Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity — are beyond amendment, forming the very foundation of the Indian State.

Conclusion

The journey from Berubari (1960) to Kesavananda Bharati (1973) reflects the evolution of constitutional thought in India — from viewing the Preamble as a mere introduction to recognizing it as the philosophical foundation of the nation’s legal and political system.

To explore such landmark judicial developments, constitutional doctrines, and detailed analyses of the Indian Polity, refer to the textbook “Indian Government and Politics” by Dr. Haridwar Shukla, published by Mahaveer Publications.
This book is crafted as per the FYUGP NEP syllabus of Indian universities and serves as an ideal resource for Political Science majors and minors, helping students gain conceptual clarity and exam-ready understanding.